Search
Search results
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Serpent's Mark in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<b>Nicholas Shelby Series</b>
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39904044-the-angel-s-mark">The Angel's Mark</a> - Not Read
#2 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2849284383">The Serpent's Mark</a> - DNF
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Book-Review-Banner-1.png"/>;
<b><i>The first book in 2019 that I didn't manage to finish is The Serpent's Mark by S.W. Perry.</i></b>
I am sad and disappointed. If you know me, you will know how I don't want to leave things unfinished, especially when reading books. I want to finish every book I read, so I can have a thorough opinion and valid comments.
I stopped reading this book at page 75, which is very early days, but I just couldn't continue because of a few points.
Before I start, I need to mention all the things that attracted me to this book in the first place. I love mysteries, and this book promised conspiracy, murder and espionage in Elizabethan London. It is set in the year 1591, where a doctor is investigated of his questionable practices. This was, by itself a promising start. And if you haven't seen the beautiful cover already, please do. It's art to have this book on your shelves.
However, while reading those 75 pages, I haven't encountered any murder. Conspiracy and espionage maybe, but it is so subtle, that everything else comes in first place, while I am here, flipping pages and desperately waiting for something to happen.
A book that contains a lot of politics and religion in a same chapter is just not the book for me. As a person that moved into the UK, I know a little bit about politics and not much about history politics, but I am also not very interested in it either. Documentaries, yes - but books for pleasure, not quite so much. This book was over-flooding with politics and religion, and it is something I just couldn't put past me. After deciding to DNF it, I also realized that it was a second book of a series, but can also be read as a standalone.
I wish I enjoyed it, but I just couldn't. However, if the book seems like something you might enjoy, please go for it, read it, and let me know how it went. <b>We all have different tastes in book - and that's OKAY! :)</b>
Thank you to ReadersFirst, a UK based website that sends me books every month in exchange for my honest reviews. What you do it absolutely amazing!
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<b>Nicholas Shelby Series</b>
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39904044-the-angel-s-mark">The Angel's Mark</a> - Not Read
#2 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2849284383">The Serpent's Mark</a> - DNF
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Book-Review-Banner-1.png"/>;
<b><i>The first book in 2019 that I didn't manage to finish is The Serpent's Mark by S.W. Perry.</i></b>
I am sad and disappointed. If you know me, you will know how I don't want to leave things unfinished, especially when reading books. I want to finish every book I read, so I can have a thorough opinion and valid comments.
I stopped reading this book at page 75, which is very early days, but I just couldn't continue because of a few points.
Before I start, I need to mention all the things that attracted me to this book in the first place. I love mysteries, and this book promised conspiracy, murder and espionage in Elizabethan London. It is set in the year 1591, where a doctor is investigated of his questionable practices. This was, by itself a promising start. And if you haven't seen the beautiful cover already, please do. It's art to have this book on your shelves.
However, while reading those 75 pages, I haven't encountered any murder. Conspiracy and espionage maybe, but it is so subtle, that everything else comes in first place, while I am here, flipping pages and desperately waiting for something to happen.
A book that contains a lot of politics and religion in a same chapter is just not the book for me. As a person that moved into the UK, I know a little bit about politics and not much about history politics, but I am also not very interested in it either. Documentaries, yes - but books for pleasure, not quite so much. This book was over-flooding with politics and religion, and it is something I just couldn't put past me. After deciding to DNF it, I also realized that it was a second book of a series, but can also be read as a standalone.
I wish I enjoyed it, but I just couldn't. However, if the book seems like something you might enjoy, please go for it, read it, and let me know how it went. <b>We all have different tastes in book - and that's OKAY! :)</b>
Thank you to ReadersFirst, a UK based website that sends me books every month in exchange for my honest reviews. What you do it absolutely amazing!
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Lonely Planet Central Asia
Lonely Planet, Mark Elliott, Bradley Mayhew and Tom Masters
Book
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher Lonely Planet Central Asia is your...
Lonely Planet Washington, Oregon & the Pacific Northwest
Lonely Planet, John Lee, Sandra Bao and Celeste Brash
Book
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher Lonely Planet Washington, Oregon & the...
Tom Stringer: A Global View
Book
Tom Stringer is a prolific and highly regarded United States based interior designer whose work...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Furies in Books
Sep 26, 2019
Violet joins Elm Hollow after the death of her little sister and father. It's a private girls school that has a history of magic and witchcraft thanks to an association with the 17th century witch trials. Violet finds herself drawn to three girls--Robin, Grace, and Alex. She becomes close with them, particularly Robin, and finds herself invited to an advanced study group led by their art teacher, Annabel, which goes into more depth about the witchcraft practiced at the school so long ago. The girls seem to think the magic is real, and that they can harness it. Always lurking in the background is Emily Frost--Robin's former best friend--who died before Violet came to Elm Hollow. She and Violet look very similar. As time passes, Violet starts to wonder if the witchcraft is real. And what really happened to Emily?
The girl is found dead on a swing on a playground on Elm Hollow Academy property--no known cause of death. That's how this novel opens, and then we have Violet, who tells us the story looking back, recounting her time at Elm Hollow. So the story opens dramatically and we know something has terrible happened. And that Violet makes it out okay.
"Inconclusive, they said, as though that changed the fact of it, which was this: a sixteen-year-old girl, dead on school property, without a single clue to suggest why or how."
This book should be been really good--I'm a sucker for private school tales (I thought it was a boarding school one, as well, but it wasn't)--but it just didn't work for me. I thought about putting it aside several times, but I just couldn't. I need to work on my DNF skills.
There is a lot here: two dead girls; witchcraft and the occult; mythology; friendship and coming of age--and none of it feels fully explored. A lot of the book focuses on mythology as Annabel teaches some of it to the girls (I felt myself skimming over that, and I like mythology). There's the focus on witchcraft, but it never seems fully embraced. There's a lot of violence (won't go too far for spoilers) but there are never really any consequences. It's very strange, and honestly, not the sort of YA book I'd encourage for teens.
And, then, I just didn't care for these characters. Robin is hateful, and I couldn't form a bond with Violet, our narrator. That would be all well and good if the action was enough to keep my interest, but it wasn't. The book just felt jumbled, and I wasn't interested in picking it up. Even a few late twists didn't really redeem things for me.
Lots of others have found the story powerful, however, so if you like mean girls with a side of possible witchcraft, you may enjoy this more. 2 stars.
The girl is found dead on a swing on a playground on Elm Hollow Academy property--no known cause of death. That's how this novel opens, and then we have Violet, who tells us the story looking back, recounting her time at Elm Hollow. So the story opens dramatically and we know something has terrible happened. And that Violet makes it out okay.
"Inconclusive, they said, as though that changed the fact of it, which was this: a sixteen-year-old girl, dead on school property, without a single clue to suggest why or how."
This book should be been really good--I'm a sucker for private school tales (I thought it was a boarding school one, as well, but it wasn't)--but it just didn't work for me. I thought about putting it aside several times, but I just couldn't. I need to work on my DNF skills.
There is a lot here: two dead girls; witchcraft and the occult; mythology; friendship and coming of age--and none of it feels fully explored. A lot of the book focuses on mythology as Annabel teaches some of it to the girls (I felt myself skimming over that, and I like mythology). There's the focus on witchcraft, but it never seems fully embraced. There's a lot of violence (won't go too far for spoilers) but there are never really any consequences. It's very strange, and honestly, not the sort of YA book I'd encourage for teens.
And, then, I just didn't care for these characters. Robin is hateful, and I couldn't form a bond with Violet, our narrator. That would be all well and good if the action was enough to keep my interest, but it wasn't. The book just felt jumbled, and I wasn't interested in picking it up. Even a few late twists didn't really redeem things for me.
Lots of others have found the story powerful, however, so if you like mean girls with a side of possible witchcraft, you may enjoy this more. 2 stars.
Twilight Struggle
Games
App
The #1 rated strategy board game gets its first expansion! Twilight Struggle: Turn Zero is a new...
BoardGames BoardgameApps Greatgames
Dana (24 KP) rated The Tempest in Books
Mar 23, 2018
I had to read this play for my Shakespeare class in college and it was the first time I had ever read it.
This was an interesting play, and I'm not sure where it will fit on my scale for my favorite Shakespearean plays. While the plot was pretty straightforward, I do not know how I necessarily felt about the characters themselves. This being Shakespeare's final play, I feel like he wanted to pull in some aspects from his previous plays to draw the crowds in one last time.
I definitely see Shakespeare in Prospero. Both men are known for their art, Prospero's being magic and Shakespeare's being his writings, and in the end, both will give up those arts to be with their families. While it cannot be proved, Shakespeare did die fairly soon after his career ended, making yet another connection where possibly his "every third thought would be of the grave" just as Prospero foretold. And of course, Prospero's final soliloquy is said to be Shakespeare's swan song, his final curtain call.
Miranda can be seen as a voice for the audience a lot throughout the play. She is the reason we get the backstory about why Prospero is doing what he is doing, she voices concerns that the audiences may all be thinking. I think this was intentional because in most of the Shakespearean plays, there is at least one character who stands in for the audience.
Ariel, not going to lie, I thought he was a female character, though I found out by reading more, and watching a filmed production of it, that he is often portrayed as a male. I do, however, want to see what a female could do with this character. Especially since he is such a pivotal character to the plot line being in most, if not all, scenes in some way or another. Without Ariel, the story would not have been able to happen.
Caliban is weird. I understand why he hates Prospero and Miranda so much, but that doesn't excuse his actions both in the actual play and before it in the history sections.
I do not quite know what to classify this play as. It is definitely not one of the tragedies (mainly because it doesn't have a character name in the title) but it also isn't really a comedy. Would it be a mystical play? I don't really know. If you do, please, message me or comment on the post, because I am curious.
This play is often referenced in literature and in pop culture, but I never fully understood what they meant, so it was fun to be able to finally get what people were talking about. That being said, I do not think this is one of his most popular plays. Yes, it was his last, but I have not seen it come up as much in my studies as, let's say, Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet.
Overall, I enjoyed the play, but it definitely isn't my favorite. That spot still goes to Macbeth.
This was an interesting play, and I'm not sure where it will fit on my scale for my favorite Shakespearean plays. While the plot was pretty straightforward, I do not know how I necessarily felt about the characters themselves. This being Shakespeare's final play, I feel like he wanted to pull in some aspects from his previous plays to draw the crowds in one last time.
I definitely see Shakespeare in Prospero. Both men are known for their art, Prospero's being magic and Shakespeare's being his writings, and in the end, both will give up those arts to be with their families. While it cannot be proved, Shakespeare did die fairly soon after his career ended, making yet another connection where possibly his "every third thought would be of the grave" just as Prospero foretold. And of course, Prospero's final soliloquy is said to be Shakespeare's swan song, his final curtain call.
Miranda can be seen as a voice for the audience a lot throughout the play. She is the reason we get the backstory about why Prospero is doing what he is doing, she voices concerns that the audiences may all be thinking. I think this was intentional because in most of the Shakespearean plays, there is at least one character who stands in for the audience.
Ariel, not going to lie, I thought he was a female character, though I found out by reading more, and watching a filmed production of it, that he is often portrayed as a male. I do, however, want to see what a female could do with this character. Especially since he is such a pivotal character to the plot line being in most, if not all, scenes in some way or another. Without Ariel, the story would not have been able to happen.
Caliban is weird. I understand why he hates Prospero and Miranda so much, but that doesn't excuse his actions both in the actual play and before it in the history sections.
I do not quite know what to classify this play as. It is definitely not one of the tragedies (mainly because it doesn't have a character name in the title) but it also isn't really a comedy. Would it be a mystical play? I don't really know. If you do, please, message me or comment on the post, because I am curious.
This play is often referenced in literature and in pop culture, but I never fully understood what they meant, so it was fun to be able to finally get what people were talking about. That being said, I do not think this is one of his most popular plays. Yes, it was his last, but I have not seen it come up as much in my studies as, let's say, Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet.
Overall, I enjoyed the play, but it definitely isn't my favorite. That spot still goes to Macbeth.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Lincoln (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
The history of this country is steeped in mystery and intrigue, but it’s fuzzy on the details. We cling to heroes of the past because we are jaded by the present. Lincoln, a new film from Steven Spielberg, comes to us at a time when there seems to be even more political strife than usual. (Or perhaps that’s just me getting older and actually paying attention.) Either way, I think this movie’s arrival on the silver screen is very timely, given the recent election.
Daniel Day Lewis, a man revered for his choice of films and roles, as well as his ability to portray characters with so much emotion and conviction, has done it once again. As the title character for this film, Lewis portrays one of the U.S.A’s greatest leaders and pioneers in a way that few other men could. Surrounded by some of the best actors in Hollywood (including Tommy Lee Jones), this star-studded film has a laundry list of very recognizable faces from all corners of Hollywood. The red carpet was clearly rolled out for this film.
The story starts amid the death and destruction of the American Civil War, an event that is both a fixed point of the story and a constant backdrop. Seeing the fighting and killing made me wonder how gritty this movie would get, but as it turns out, they kept the level of gore pretty low.
The film goes on to set the stage for the final footsteps into the southern theater that was the Civil War. In tandem, it follows the highly controversial 13th amendment, which was barely passed at the time due to racism and the belief that one color of human should be slave to another color. The absurdity of this notion is highlighted, but it’s also familiar in the way it parallels issues we face today: legalizing pot, gay marriage, prostitution, the right to bear arms, etc. Perhaps our grandchildren will watch a film in the future about these struggles, and regard it as we do a film about the Civil War. As I sat and watched this movie, I was nearly in tears at the thought of how African-Americans were once regarded as lesser beings. Will our grandchildren cry at the ridiculousness of our beliefs?
The cinematography was amazingly crisp. Many of the characters are introduced in such a way that they have a grand entrance through the mystique created by camera angles. I have to truly applaud Spielberg for what might be his best film yet. The camera work was immensely effective, relying heavily on the contrast between shadow and light. Coupled with richly detailed sets, it made everything staggeringly realistic, and absolutely convincing.
I will say this for Lincoln: I haven’t been so moved and taken aback by a period film in my life. This is a must see for everyone.
The dialog is highly political, and sometimes goes along at quite a clip; be prepared to miss a few things the first time around. However, watching it a second time surely won’t be a sin. The humor alone merits a second viewing. There are many good laughs to be had.
Lincoln is a work of art.
Daniel Day Lewis, a man revered for his choice of films and roles, as well as his ability to portray characters with so much emotion and conviction, has done it once again. As the title character for this film, Lewis portrays one of the U.S.A’s greatest leaders and pioneers in a way that few other men could. Surrounded by some of the best actors in Hollywood (including Tommy Lee Jones), this star-studded film has a laundry list of very recognizable faces from all corners of Hollywood. The red carpet was clearly rolled out for this film.
The story starts amid the death and destruction of the American Civil War, an event that is both a fixed point of the story and a constant backdrop. Seeing the fighting and killing made me wonder how gritty this movie would get, but as it turns out, they kept the level of gore pretty low.
The film goes on to set the stage for the final footsteps into the southern theater that was the Civil War. In tandem, it follows the highly controversial 13th amendment, which was barely passed at the time due to racism and the belief that one color of human should be slave to another color. The absurdity of this notion is highlighted, but it’s also familiar in the way it parallels issues we face today: legalizing pot, gay marriage, prostitution, the right to bear arms, etc. Perhaps our grandchildren will watch a film in the future about these struggles, and regard it as we do a film about the Civil War. As I sat and watched this movie, I was nearly in tears at the thought of how African-Americans were once regarded as lesser beings. Will our grandchildren cry at the ridiculousness of our beliefs?
The cinematography was amazingly crisp. Many of the characters are introduced in such a way that they have a grand entrance through the mystique created by camera angles. I have to truly applaud Spielberg for what might be his best film yet. The camera work was immensely effective, relying heavily on the contrast between shadow and light. Coupled with richly detailed sets, it made everything staggeringly realistic, and absolutely convincing.
I will say this for Lincoln: I haven’t been so moved and taken aback by a period film in my life. This is a must see for everyone.
The dialog is highly political, and sometimes goes along at quite a clip; be prepared to miss a few things the first time around. However, watching it a second time surely won’t be a sin. The humor alone merits a second viewing. There are many good laughs to be had.
Lincoln is a work of art.
Lonely Planet Oman, UAE & Arabian Peninsula
Lonely Planet, Stuart Butler, Anthony Ham and Jenny Walker
Book
Lonely Planet: The world's leading travel guide publisher Lonely Planet Oman, UAE & Arabian...
Astro Gold
Lifestyle
App
Astro Gold is the professional-level astrology iPhone and iPad app that you have been waiting for! ...